Keywords

1 Introduction

Economics have become an integral part of the private and public sphere and are also gaining political importance (Beck et al. 2012; Hester and Gibson 2003; Mast et al. 2017). Whether financial and economic crises, corporate insolvencies, or the general job market—economic issues are not only highly relevant on a societal level, but also matter to individuals on a personal level, as for example seen with employees or consumers. Furthermore, events that are not primarily economic in nature can have a strong impact on the economy, the Covid-19 pandemic being a prime example. Thus, economic issues and their respective communication remain of critical importance not only in times of crisis.

In light of its wide-ranging audience, information quality, and credibility, journalism can be considered the most important actor within public economic communications (Mast and Spachmann 2014; Mast et al. 2017). Economics and business news are not only classic, but also fundamental columns of media coverage. This is in addition to topics on economics that are also represented in other sections as so-called cross-sectional topics (Beck et al. 2012; Heinrich and Moss 2006; Mast 2012; Mast and Spachmann 2005). Lastly, journalists interpret events from other areas (e.g. politics, sports) with an economic focus through emphasis of their economic aspects (Mast and Spachmann 2014).

Economics has therefore always been heterogeneous and diverse in nature, making it a challenging task to define the subject of “economic news coverage”. Economic journalism mainly contains economics, business, and finance (Arrese and Vara 2015). Traditionally, these include reporting on markets and industries, companies, business cycles, finance and stock markets, products and consumers (as well as economic policy in a broad definition) (Brandstetter and Range 2017; Mast 2012). Depending on the subject of investigation, other topics such as economic crime, taxes, or careers may also be included (Beck et al. 2012). It is at this point that the great thematic variety and subject breadth and depth of economic news becomes apparent.

2 Frequent Research Designs and Combination of Methods

The different types of economics can be found in the most diverse shapes and forms of media. There is no such thing as just one form of economic journalism, but a wide range of publication types and formats (Mast and Spachmann 2005). Considering the diversity of the field and thus the heterogeneity of existing research, a selection of the most recent literature using standardized content analyses will be reviewed and discussed.

The underlying research field is methodologically mainly characterized by standardized manual content analyses (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Arrese and Vara 2015; Cinalli and Giugni 2018; Denner et al. 2020; Dogruel et al. 2013; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Lischka 2014; Lohs 2020) with only a few automated content analyses/procedures (e.g. Damstra and Boukes 2018; van Dalen et al. 2017).

Some authors combine different methods such as qualitative surveys of experts or journalists and standardized content analyses (e.g. Arlt and Storz 2010; Beck et al. 2012; Berghofer et al. 2014). There are also some surveys of recipients combined with standardized content analyses (e.g. Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneider 2000; Quiring 2003; Hester and Gibson 2003; Svensson et al. 2017a). The combination of qualitative and standardized content analyses is less common (e.g. Bach et al. 2012, 2013; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Knowles et al. 2017).

Thematic Focus

A primary focus in this area of research includes studies focusing on general economic news coverage (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Beck et al. 2012; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Lischka 2014). More frequently, however, is the examination of different sub-categories of economic news coverage often focusing on financial and economic crises (e.g. Arrese and Vara 2015; Bach et al. 2012, 2013; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneider 2000; Cinalli and Giugni 2018; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Doudaki et al. 2019; Knowles et al. 2017). Studies on business or corporate news are less frequent (e.g. Brettschneider and Vollbracht 2010; Denner et al. 2020; Merrill 2019; Shaw 2016), the same applies to topics such as unemployment (Quiring 2003) or economic policy/financial market policy (e.g. Arlt and Storz 2010; Merrill 2019). Some studies also conduct exemplary analyses on specific economic topics, instead of examining explicitly economy-oriented issues (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Berghofer et al. 2014; Brettschneider 2000; Dogruel et al. 2013; Kostadinova and Dimitrova 2012).

Media Samples

Whilst numerous content analyses focus on print media only (e.g. Arrese and Vara 2015; Bach et al. 2012; Beck et al. 2012; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Cinalli and Giugni 2018; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Knowles et al. 2017; Mercille 2014), TV and radio are less well analyzed: there are combinations of TV and print news (e.g. Arlt and Storz 2010; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneider 2000; Hester and Gibson 2003; Lischka 2014), TV and radio news (Sommer et al. 2010) as well as TV exclusively (Quiring 2003). Some content analyses of economic news coverage compare different media genres, for example print vs. online media (Beck et al. 2012), quality and popular press/tabloids, business press/financial outlets (e.g. Arrese and Vara 2015; Beck et al. 2012; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Damstra and Boukes, 2018; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018) or political inclination of newspapers (left–right) (Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015).

Countries

The content analyses on economic news coverage and its sub-categories were conducted in reference to numerous countries, such as Bulgaria (Kostadinova and Dimitrova 2012), Denmark (Svensson et al. 2017a; van Dalen et al. 2017), Germany (Arlt and Storz 2010; Bach et al. 2012, 2013; Beck et al. 2012; Berghofer et al. 2014; Dogruel et al. 2013; Lischka 2014; Quiring 2003), Great Britain (Merrill 2019), Greece (Doudaki et al. 2019), Ireland (Mercille 2014), Japan (Wu et al. 2004), the Netherlands (Alsem et al. 2008; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018), Switzerland (Sommer et al. 2010), USA (Hester and Gibson 2003; Wu 2002). In addition, there are country-specific content analyses focusing on particular aspects, such as the comparison of Germany’s old and new states (Brettschneider 2000) or Switzerland’s different language regions (Sommer et al. 2010).

Comparative analyses between countries are less frequent (e.g. Arrese and Vara 2015; Cinalli and Giugni 2018; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Knowles et al. 2017) and mostly focus on print media: The study by Cinalli and Giugni (2018) is particularly extensive. The authors examine the economic crisis (started in 2008) and conduct a claims analysis of articles in five daily newspapers in nine European countries (France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland) between 2005 and 2014 (Cinalli and Giugni 2018). Other studies compare economic journalism in Germany, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom between 2007 and 2012 (Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015) or focus on three English-speaking countries (the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and Australia) over three decades (1990s, 2000, 2007–2008) (Knowles et al. 2017).

Analyses Over Time

Data on economic news over time is mainly available for individual countries: e.g. Bulgaria from 1990 to 2009 (Kostadinova and Dimitrova 2012), Denmark from 1996 to 2012 (van Dalen et al. 2017), Germany from 1994 to 1998 (Quiring 2003) and from 2002 to 2010 (Lischka 2014), Ireland from 1995 to 2011 (Mercille 2014), the Netherlands from 1998 to 2003 (Alsem et al. 2008), from 2002 to 2015 (Damstra and Boukes 2018) and from 2007 to 2013 (Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018) and the USA from 1987 to 1996 (Wu 2002) and from 1998 to 2002 (Hester and Gibson 2003). Analyses that integrate both, a transnational and a chronological perspective, are less frequent (Cinalli and Giugni 2018; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Knowles et al. 2017).

3 Constructs and Main Results

The research questions examined in the studies with content analyses of economic news coverage and its sub-areas refer theoretically to four different aspects: 1) the quality of news coverage in a broader sense (e.g. Arlt and Storz 2010; Arrese and Vara 2015; Beck et al. 2012; Dogruel et al. 2013; Knowles et al. 2017; Lischka 2014). In addition, numerous studies examine economic news coverage in relation to 2) framing (e.g. Bach et al. 2012, 2013; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Doudaki et al. 2019; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Kostadinova and Dimitrova 2012), and, but less frequently, ‘claim making’ (Cinalli & Giugni, 2018). Combined methods with standardized content analyses and surveys of recipients often examine 3) media effects—the overall impact that news coverage may have on viewers perception (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneider 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Quiring 2003; Svensson et al. 2017b; Van Dalen et al. 2016). On rare occasions Agenda-setting effects are also considered (Hester and Gibson 2003). The last aspect considers 4) relationships with the real economy: Some authors examine to what extent economic developments are related to media coverage (e.g. Brettschneider 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003; Quiring 2003; Van Dalen et al. 2016). The main constructs and results in relation to economic news coverage in general or in the context of economic and financial crises can be summarized as follows:

  1. 1.

    Quality: the keyword ‘quality’ (in a broad sense) encompasses a range of constructs and study results that refer to a) the proportion and general characteristics of economic news coverage, b) its diversity and c) tabloidization.

    1. a)

      Proportion and general characteristics: The presentation of economic issues is primarily depending on the specific issue, the medium and the audience (Spachmann 2005). For economic news coverage in general, study results from Germany show that the proportion of business reporting in tabloids is less than half as large as compared to quality press (Beck et al. 2012). Moreover, consumer reports are gaining importance with an increased emphasis on user-value (value of benefit for the recipients) (e.g. Beck et al. 2012; Brandstetter and Range 2017; Mast 2003).

    2. b)

      Diversity: Economic news coverage tends to be uniform, especially for the economic and financial crisis coverage. This means homogeneous news coverage with little diversity in topics, little room for alternative perspectives and actors as well as lack of diversity of information sources. This can be seen in relation to different countries, media types, genres and also over time (e.g. Beck et al. 2012; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Knowles et al. 2017).

    3. c)

      Tabloidization: While only a few studies address tabloidization in general (Beck et al. 2012; Dogruel et al. 2013), the aspect of negativity/negativism is examined far more frequently. The results show that journalists overemphasize negative stories, while positive developments are often neglected. Negativity biases and mediated uncertainty have been found in newspaper reporting on a number of economic issues and are also documented for individual topics on television (e.g. Brettschneider 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003; Quiring 2003; Van Dalen et al. 2016). In addition to negativity, the tabloid characteristics scandalization, speculation, and emotionalization are emphasized in the economic news coverage in Germany, both in tabloid and quality press (Beck et al. 2012). It is also being criticized that studies on the economic and financial crisis are being presented as too simplistic, uncritical or alarming (Arrese and Vara 2015).

  2. 2.

    Framing: In the operationalization of frames in the analysis of economic news, the inductive approach dominates. In this approach, frame elements (Entman 1993, 2003; Benford and Snow 2000) are identified in the media content and frequently occurring combinations of these elements result in frames (e.g. Bach et al. 2012, 2013; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015; Quiring et al. 2013). Bach et al. (2012, 2013) choose a multilevel operationalization by first qualitatively condensing different frame elements into frames based on a small media sample and then examining them quantitatively in the whole news sample. A deductive approach of pre-determined holistic frames, by contrast, rarely occurs in the field of economic media coverage.

    In line with the results regarding negativity in economic news, negative rather than positive frames and only a few critical positions are evident (e.g. Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003). Other studies demonstrate that the “communicative complexity” of media coverage (understood as the variety of actors and issues (agenda complexity) and the association between them (frame complexity)), is dependent on the different phases of crisis news coverage (Kleinnijenhuis et al. 2015). Quiring et al. (2013), as well as Bach et al. (2012, 2013), show for the news coverage during the financial crisis that single frames clearly dominate, but that within the news coverage the dominance of different frames varies strongly over time. In addition, some frames are found to complement each other, while others tend to compete.

  3. 3.

    Media effects: Studies that combine content analyses with surveys of recipients show that the specific presentation of economic news coverage impacts the opinion, attitude, and behavior of recipients. In content analyses the constructs ambiguity and negativity are often measured: Ambiguity in media coverage, negativity and mediated uncertainty lead to pessimism and negatively influence changes in consumer confidence. This not only impacts consumer behavior, but also economic conditions. The results are particularly evident for the economic and financial crisis in print media and television as well as for various countries and over time (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneider 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Svensson et al. 2017b; Van Dalen et al. 2016). Scheufele et al. (2011) content-analyzed the valence of financial news; however, in their study of the media effect on stock prices, they did not find any media effects but, on the contrary, rather evidence that media reflect real stock developments.

  4. 4.

    Relationships with the real economy: Some studies show a relationship between real economic factors and media coverage. For this purpose, statistics and “real-world” economic indicators are compared with the media coverage. Measured constructs in the media content are, for example, economic changes (positive/negative) or volume and tone of coverage (positive/negative) (e.g. Brettschneider 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003; Quiring 2003; Van Dalen et al. 2016). Results show that media pay more attention to negative economic events and present them more negatively (Hester and Gibson 2003). However, it was also shown that in the case of positive developments, the media present reality even more positively, i.e. the media function as a “magnifying glass” (Van Dalen 2017).

4 Research Desiderata

Economic and financial crises are of great importance to society and lead to special public interest. Nevertheless, economic news coverage consists of much more than ‘just’ crises. Still, there are more studies that deal with economic crises than economic news coverage in its variety: Smaller and supposedly less spectacular economic issues are underrepresented in research. Some of the analyses in country and time comparisons also largely focus on times of crisis. In this regard, analyses with a broader or different thematic focus would be beneficial.

In addition, some authors question the quality of the news coverage by assuming negativity and biases, as well as a lack of diversity (e.g. Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Brettschneide 2000; Damstra and Boukes 2018; Damstra and Vliegenthart 2018; Hester and Gibson 2003; Knowles et al. 2017; Quiring 2003; Svensson et al. 2017b; Van Dalen et al. 2016). But the phenomenon of tabloidization is rarely or only partially investigated. Methodologically, the results often refer to press coverage, with a few (older) exceptions. Future researchH should therefore also take into account a wider range of media information channels. Despite its relevance as a source of information for economics, TV content is much less frequently examined than press coverage. There is also a lack of current research on the presentation of economic issues in fictional TV content (IFEM 2005).

Finally, studies that take the recipient’s perspective into account show that economic issues are usually part of everyone’s daily life. They shape the way people think about the economy and impact consumerism. In this regard some authors argue that the recipient’s perspective should be integrated more strongly. This means data from qualitative or quantitative surveys of recipients should be linked more closely to the results of standardized content analyses (e.g. Alsem et al. 2008; Boomgaarden et al. 2011; Mast et al. 2017; Svensson et al. 2017a).

Furthermore, comparative analyses between countries are less frequent. In addition, data on economic news over time is mainly available for individual countries. Consequently, more comparative analyses between countries and analyses over time would be beneficial.